Des Moines police see value in assuring the public

Nov. 26, 2012

Written by

The Register’s Editorial

University of Iowa President Sally Mason told Des Moines Register sports columnist Bryce Miller that she and the Register “we’re going to have to disagree” on the question of how much information the university can disclose about its employees.

She is right about that. We do disagree with the university’s dogged insistence that it cannot talk about “personnel matters.” That practice does not follow either the letter or the intent of Iowa’s open-records law. In fact, if the U of I’s wrongheaded position on this issue were the practice of all state and local governments, Iowans would have far less information with which to judge the performance of government employees.

The question of U of I employee personnel records came up again in the context of the imbroglio over former athletic department counselor Peter Gray. He resigned under a cloud of secrecy after being accused of sexual harassment of students and athletes, the Iowa City Press-Citizen reported. The report was based on an internal investigative report that was leaked to the newspaper.

When the story broke, university officials retreated to their typical position in such cases: We don’t talk about “personnel matters.” By that they mean they don’t talk about personnel matters that reflect badly on the university.

They cite a section of Chapter 22 of the Iowa Code that allows state and local governments to keep confidential certain “personal information in confidential personnel records.”

Note the word “allows.” Section 7 of Chapter 22 lists more than 60 exemptions to the law’s general policy that records of state and local governments are open to the public. The list of exemptions follows an introductory paragraph that says: “The following public records shall be kept confidential, unless otherwise ordered by a court, by the lawful custodian of the records, or by another person duly authorized to release such information.”

As the lawful custodian of personnel records of University of Iowa employees, U of I administrators have the authority to release those records. The blanket assertion repeatedly made by University of Iowa officials that “personnel records” are off limits to public disclosure is simply incorrect.

But don’t take our word for it. Here is what Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller’s staff said last year in a legal brief to the Iowa Supreme Court: “Public records custodians generally have discretion to release documents listed in section 22.7.” This, by the way, is the same attorney general’s office that ultimately gives legal advice to the University of Iowa.

If the university can cite an exception elsewhere in the Iowa Code that specifically prohibits releasing certain information contained in confidential personnel records, such as medical records or Social Security numbers, it should say so. Otherwise, it should quit using the blanket “personnel records” reason to avoid disclosing information about its employees who screw up.

Fortunately, other public officials in Iowa take just the opposite view. A notable example is Des Moines Police Chief Judy Bradshaw, who routinely releases information to the public when police officers are disciplined. Bradshaw’s practice is aimed at assuring Des Moines citizens that the department takes seriously misbehavior by its officers.

If the University of Iowa’s contrary practice causes other public officials to use the “personnel records” catch-all excuse to throw a broad blanket of secrecy over the performance of government employees, the Legislature should step in next year and clarify the law.